[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Harris-Lewis's at it again
This woman's getting to be an embarrassemt. What greed. Get out and get a
job!!!
At 11:18 AM 3/28/00 -0500, you wrote:
>Golddigger and accomplice in her husband's death Donna Harris-Lewis is at
>it again.
>Unbelievable...
>
> What was Harris-Lewis thinking?
> by Steve Buckley
>
> Tuesday, March 28, 2000
>
> You want to believe that Donna Harris-Lewis was
>misquoted, or, at the very least,
> taken out of context.
>
> Hey, it happens. People say things. The words somehow
>get mixed up, and they
> come out all wrong. But you can spend the entire day
>re-reading the closing
> paragraph in Gretchen Voss' article in the April issue
>of Boston magazine, and
> it's impossible not to wonder: What on earth was Donna
>Harris-Lewis thinking?
>
> Harris-Lewis, we all know by now, is getting warmed up
>for the second
> malpractice trial in the death of her husband, former
>Celtics star Reggie Lewis.
> She recently gave an interview to Voss, who ended her
>Boston magazine article
> with the following quote:
>
> ``You know, I think about those firefighters in
>Worcester,'' Harris-Lewis is quoted
> as saying. ``Lots of money is being raised for those
>families, and I need to be
> taken care of, too. Everybody has to say I'm greedy. But
>I do want my money
> back this time around. Why should I lose?''
>
> She needs to be taken care of.
>
> She wants her money back this time around.
>
> Why should she lose.
>
> Yikes.
>
> This is a far cry from the woman whose purported
>mission, she keeps saying, is
> to clear her late husband's name and stop the spread of
>those rumors about
> cocaine use. Remember the night the Celtics retired
>Lewis' uniform number and
> Harris-Lewis read her little poem?
>
> ``Character is the one thing that never dies,
>
> Let's not believe these harmful lies.''
>
> And now she is comparing her plight with that of the
>families of six Worcester
> firefighters who died in the line of duty last December.
>Let's be clear on this: The
> only thing that Reggie Lewis' death has in common with
>the deaths of those six
> Worcester firefighters is that in both cases we are
>talking about children who
> suddenly, tragically, were left without a father.
>
> But the six Worcester firefighters died trying to bring
>down a warehouse fire. Two
> of them were looking for people who might have been
>trapped in the fire; the other
> four went in looking for their two missing comrades.
>
> That's how jakes make their living. Every day they go to
>work, it is with the
> knowledge that they may be called upon to enter a
>burning building and save
> lives. They understand, their families understand. It's
>all part of the job.
> Sometimes, the danger is clearly evident, as was the
>case that night in
> Worcester. The building was ablaze. Sometimes, death is
>entirely unexpected:
> On June 17, 1972, nine Boston firefighters were killed
>in the Hotel Vendome
> collapse. The fire was out; they were overhauling the
>building. The last body was
> removed from the rubble the following morning, Fathers
Day.
>
> Firefighters are not rich or glamorous. They do not
>perform their jobs in front of
> thousands of adoring fans. They do not get asked to sign
>autographs. They don't
> have agents. A goodly number of them have second jobs to
>help make ends
> meet.
>
> Firefighters are the last people you think of on a good
>day, but the first people
> you think of when you smell smoke.
>
> The six Worcester firefighters were not told by a
>``Dream Team'' of doctors that
> they had serious heart ailments and would have to stop
>doing their jobs. And
> they were not spirited away one night and taken to yet
>another doctor, who told
> them that they had nothing more than a ``benign fainting
>condition.''
>
> And the six Worcester firefighters were not quizzed by
>both sets of doctors about
> possible cocaine use.
>
> If Harris-Lewis' only point had been to raise the issue
>of young children losing
> their father, she might have been able to pull it off.
>But it is an awkward
> comparison at best, and those supporting comments - she
>wants her money this
> time around, she needs to be taken care of, etc. - make
>her sound every bit the
> ``money-hungry, gold-digging witch'' her critics have
>accused her of being.
>
> She has a right to sue. We do, after all, live in a
>litigious society. But there is a
> price to pay, and we're not just talking about legal
>fees. Once again, the lawyers
> at the other table will raise the issue of Reggie Lewis'
>alleged cocaine use, and,
> once again, the Harris-Lewis camp will be forced into
>damage control.
>
> Anyway, that's the way it was during the first trial.
>
> This time, it's even worse. Now, Donna Harris-Lewis
>wants her money, because,
> after all, didn't the families of those Worcester
>firefighters get their money?
>
> Out in Worcester, the families of those six fallen jakes
>are just trying to get on
> with their lives. Would that Donna Harris-Lewis could
>get on with her life.
>
>
>